By Bob Barney - The Plain Truth.com
When Edward Snowden came forward to identify himself as the leaker of the National Security Agency spying programs, politicians and the media alike, from left to right have been working overtime to discredit the man who some actually view as a hero for revealing crucial information the government had kept secret. Apparently, if you think hiding information about spying on Americans is new, and that it took some 29 year-old nobody to reveal these secrets, then you are a part of the great silent majority of Americans who have kept themselves in the dark. The real problem is not that our government is spying on us, it is that this has been known to anyone with a micron of a brain since the 1970's! I am amazed at the fact that I could be Edward Snowden- and have never worked for the NSA, CIA or the United States Government! In fact, I know of many more secrets than he has revealed, and have known many of them since the 1970's!
For example: I knew all of this (with links to the stories):
In the 1970's I knew that:
1 Kennedy had the President of South Vietnam assassinated because he was becoming a national patriot. President Johnson believed what Richard Nixon always knew: that the Kennedy White House did not merely tolerate or encourage the murder of Ngo Dinh Diem, but organized and executed it because he was turning against USA policies that would eventually end up in the slaughter of some 60,000 young American drafted, and tens of thousands more maimed for life! It's part of the record. I know it from reading, not from working for Uncle Sam. Three weeks later, Kennedy fulfilled Jesus' prophecy: “Those who live by the sword, will die by the sword” when he himself was gunned down in Dallas. Oh, by the way, anyone with a brain that can connect three dots knows what and who was behind that....
2 Daniel Ellsberg, the original Edward Snowden of his day released the Pentagon Papers, papers that contain a history of the U.S. role in Indochina from World War II until May 1968 and that were commissioned in 1967 by U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara. In them it was revealed that the Harry S. Truman administration gave military aid to France in its colonial war against the communist-led Viet Minh, thus directly involving the United States in Vietnam; that in 1954 Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower decided to prevent a communist takeover of South Vietnam and to undermine the new communist regime of North Vietnam; that Pres. John F. Kennedy transformed the policy of “limited-risk gamble” that he had inherited into a policy of “broad commitment”; that Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson intensified covert warfare against North Vietnam and began planning to wage overt war in 1964, a full year before the depth of U.S. involvement was publicly revealed; and that Johnson ordered the bombing of North Vietnam in 1965 despite the judgment of the U.S. intelligence community that it would not cause the North Vietnamese to cease their support of the Viet Cong insurgency in South Vietnam. The release of the Pentagon Papers stirred nationwide and, indeed, international controversy because it occurred after several years of growing dissent over the legal and moral justification of intensifying U.S. actions in Vietnam. The disclosures and their continued publication despite top-secret classification were embarrassing to the administration of Pres. Richard M. Nixon, who was preparing to seek reelection in 1972. So distressing were these revelations that Nixon authorized unlawful efforts to discredit Ellsberg, efforts that came to light during the investigation of the Watergate Scandal. Sound familiar???? I knew this and no, I didn't work for the Government as Edward Snowden!
3 Three Days of the Condor, is a 1975 American political thriller film directed by Sydney Pollack and starring Robert Redford. The film is about a bookish CIA researcher who comes back from lunch and discovers all his co-workers dead, and must outwit those responsible until he figures out whom he can really trust. The film addresses the perceived moral ambiguity of the actions of elements within the United States government during the early 1970s. It was all about how the CIA had people reading everything, that was ever published, snooping into the minds of terrorists, communist and arab oil sheiks! The film exposed a view that we were going to be fighting a war in the Middle East to get oil, fully 30 years before King George the II did exactly that in Iraq. The film ends with another quirk. The Robert Redford character (think of Snowden) goes back to New York City and meets the CIA boss on a busy street. The CIA boss defends the oil fields plan, claiming that there will be a day in which oil shortages will cause a major economic crisis for the country. And when that day comes, Americans will want the government to use any means necessary to obtain the oil. Turner (Redford) says he has told the press "a story" (they are standing outside The New York Times office), but Higgins (CIA boss) questions Turner's assurances that the story will be printed, “what if they won't print it?” He asks. After a brief dialogue, an anxious Turner walks away. Today we are seeing what happens when most of the Obama controlled media won't report on what whistle blowers are saying – or calling them traitors long before any trial is held!
4 After both the 1974 and 1979 oil shortages, I knew that the shortages were contrived by our government. At the time nobody believed it, but I did. I can add. 1+1 = 2. Most think it = 3 or more! You see those who stayed informed knew that boats laden with oil were not allowed to unload the oil, and were parked outside US ports as people waited in line for gas! Why? Overlooked by most scholars, it was Nixon and Kissinger idea to engineer the rise in oil prices between 1969 and 1972 to enable Saudi Arabia and Iran to purchase the necessary military hardware to serve as guardians of the Gulf.
I was good friends at the time with someone in the gas business who told me this long before I read about it. And no, I didn't work for the Government as Edward Snowden did, to know it!
5 George Bush's father Prescott was a Nazi, who was actually Adolf Hitler's American banker! The central charge that Prescott Bush aided Hitler is a fact. In 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act, the U.S. government seized several companies in which he had an interest. Prescott at the time was an investment banker with Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), which had funneled U.S. capital into Germany during the 1920s and '30s. Among the seized companies was the Union Banking Corporation (UBC) of New York, which was controlled by German industrialist Fritz Thyssen. Thyssen had been an early financier of the Nazi party — in fact, in 1941 he published a book entitled I Paid Hitler. Ergo, Prescott helped finance the Nazis. In fact some of the most distinguished names in American business had investments or subsidiaries in prewar Germany, including Standard Oil, General Motors and Henry Ford. When did I know this? I worked for a man who fought in WWII under Patton, his name was Ed. Many times during our working day, Ed would recite to me how, in World War II, the allies bombed everything site in towns and cities all over Germany. He said we bombed churches, hospitals, schools and yes houses. We did this in order to break the back of Germany and most importantly the German civilian. Ed recalled how shocked he was one he saw one building we never bombed. My friend was shocked to see that the FORD PLANT was completely undamaged! Every building around it including schools were leved to the ground, but someohow we "missed" the Ford plant! Yes, not a shingle was blown of the roof: Here is a photo of the plant back in operation 1 DAY AFTER THE WAR ENDED:
In the 1980's I Knew:
1 That every phone call was recorded in America, and listened to by computers. This was told to my brother, by someone he went to school with the was very high up in the government. This was 1983-- 30 years before Snowden. In a CNN interview about the Boston Bombings investigations, a former FBI counterterrorism agent admitted a startling (yet unsurprising) fact: “all digital communications” are recorded and stored. All of them. All phone calls, all e-mails and all social media interactions. According to him, there is definitely a way of retracing and listening to any phone call made on US soil. While most Americans ignore or deny this reality, the shaping of the USA into a heavily monitored police state is complete. Here is part of the CNN interview. He admitted this was going on since the 1980's! How did I know....
2 I also knew that the USA recorded everything was said in the air between airplanes. Remember Korean flight 007? Yes, folks, that was the flight #, YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP ANY BETTER than reality! On September 1, 1983, Korean Airlines (KAL) flight 007 was on the last leg of a flight from New York City to Seoul, with a stopover in Anchorage, Alaska. The flight was of of many Korean airliners used as “spy” planes, that would have cameras mounted on their noses to take pictures of the USSR in fly overs. As 007 approached its final destination, the plane began to veer far off its normal course. In just a short time, the plane flew into Russian airspace and crossed over the Kamchatka Peninsula, where some top-secret Soviet military installations were known to be located. The Soviets sent two fighters to intercept the plane. According to tapes of the conversations between the fighter pilots and Soviet ground control, the fighters quickly located the KAL flight and tried to make contact with the passenger jet. Failing to receive a response, one of the fighters fired a heat-seeking missile. KAL 007 was hit and plummeted into the Sea of Japan. All 269 people on board were killed. Much to the shock of the world (and his own CIA) Reagan decided to play the actual recordings of the attack at the UN! Yes, not only did we know it was happening in real time, we had it recorded! Jeane Kirkpatrick, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and at the behest of Reagan, placed a large television in the Security Council and played the recorded tapes of the fighter pilots and ground control for the world to hear:
The Soviet delegation had their backs turned towards the screen even as they repeated the Tass statement on the loss of the plane. Links: here and here (from 1984 Hustler mag with no centerfold shown!)
I knew this in 1983 And no, I didn't work for the Government as Edward Snowden!
3 REX and Civilian Concentration Camps. Back in the 1980's, the biggest scandal of the day was the “Iran/Contra” hearings on Capital Hill. I listened and watched them all. I am a political junkie. It is what I went to college for. I heard testimony about another plan my brother had told me about in 1983. That we had plans from the 1960's for civilian concentration camps in case marshall law was to be issued. Though not put into effect, Rex 84 (Readiness Exercise 1984), a test by the United States federal government (including FEMA) to detain large numbers of U.S. citizens in case of massive civil unrest or national emergency. This was a revival of the similar 1960s-era Operation Garden Plot, adjusted from a context then of inner-city unrest to a likely mass opposition to wider war in Central America in the 1980s. A similar plan is on the books post-9/11, with hundreds of millions of dollars earmarked for Halliburton to build the processing facilities in the event of a "national ermergency."
4 In a 1998 article, Daniel Tsang revealed “Because of me, the Central Intelligence Agency has had to concede it does spy on Americans. Just last month, the agency had to remove a denial posted on its Web site that it doesn't do this. For it kept a file on me throughout the 1980s and '90s--despite a law against political spying on Americans.
"Just before Christmas, the CIA revised its Web site. The new version says the CIA can keep files on Americans if they are suspected of espionage or international terrorism.
"But I am no spy or terrorist. The CIA conceded as much by settling my lawsuit, paying my lawyers some $ 46,000 and promising to expunge my file and never spy on my political activities in the future. But the CIA didn't just compile a dossier on me. It turned it over to a foreign government. Is that standard operating procedure, turning over information on Americans whenever a foreign government asks? After all, on its new Web site, the CIA admits it "works with friendly foreign governments and shares pertinent information.
"The CIA's original Web site advised browsers to use the U.S. Privacy Act to confirm that the CIA does not keep files on us. But that recommendation no longer appears. I used the Privacy Act to request my file, but the CIA long refused to release it, claiming "national security." Only when I got the Center for National Security Studies and the American Civil Liberties Union involved in a lawsuit against the CIA did I get my file, though many sections were still blacked out.
"For the past decade, I've lived a somewhat Kafkaesque life. When friends and UC Irvine colleagues heard about my CIA file, some wondered if they should be seen talking with me. I wondered if I was becoming paranoid. I wondered whether phone calls on my cordless phone were being intercepted: Every time I heard some static on the phone, I got nervous, though I know sophisticated spycraft would leave no traces.
"Worse was when I traveled abroad: I never knew if the CIA had sent instructions to bar me from entering a particular country. On my last visit to Taiwan, I got in but, at the airport departure gate, an immigration official wouldn't let me board my plane home until I produced my California driver's license. My newly minted--and renewed--U.S. passport was not good enough.
"My lawyers discovered that the CIA actually doesn't follow the Privacy Act's ban on collecting information on Americans' activities protected by the 1st Amendment. Congress enacted that ban in the wake of widespread domestic spying during the Vietnam War. It is time for Congress to act again to ensure the act is not being eviscerated today." Link
OH, BY THE WAY- the man was a homosexual activist. A LEFTY Liberal... Not a member of the Tea Party. I knew this this at the time, and NO, I didn't work for the Government as Edward Snowden!
Waco – I learned in the 1990's that not only was all telephone calls listened to (I knew this since 1983), but that the government could ease-drop in on any conversation in your home at any time without a warrant. This first came to light during the WACO SEIGE. From the New York Times: “Over the eavesdropping device, someone inside the compound was heard saying, "Don't shoot until the very last minute."
Hearing that, a Federal official in Washington wondered aloud if the cult was expecting a fierce "banzai" raid.
Another voice, believed to be that of David Koresh, was heard on the eavesdropping device saying, "Stay low, stay ready and loaded."”
Yes, the government can listen to whatever you say at home in any conversation. The FBI can listen to everything you say, even when the cell phone is turned off. A recent court ruling in a case against the Genovese crime family revealed that the FBI has the ability from a remote location to activate a cell phone and turn its microphone into a listening device that transmits to an FBI listening post, a method known as a "roving bug." I've know that since 1993! And no, I didn't work for the Government as Edward Snowden!
What really happened on 9-11?
Conspiracy theorists will not like what I have to say here, but what really happened on 9-11 was not some big time NSA-Israeli plot to cause us to go to war. The Plain Truth is that there is a much easier explanation. Look back to history, and one can conclude that history repeated just itself on 9-11. The original historical evidence happened on 12-7-41! Yes PEARL HARBOR. Reports that are known today prove that America knew of the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbor. We had broke the Japanese code! So why didn't we stop the attack? The simple explanation is Hubris! Roosevelt needed Japan to attack us, but thought the Japs were not able to inflict much damage. Let them bomb a few buildings and ships, and then declare war. We were expected a small operation, not a large one. We got caught being stupid. This is what happened on 9-11, and the recent BOSTON BOMBINGS! We knew both were going to happen. Heck, we even sent NAVY SEALS to Boston during the marathon!
And yes we knew about planes being flown into buildings. Condoleezza Rice testified that she never knew about these plans, although she had a paper sitting on her desk before 9-11 from the NSA and CIA, it was Called, “HOW TERRORIST PLAN TO FLY AIRPLANES INTO BUILDINGS.” She wasn't in on the planning as conspiratists claim, she was just “out to lunch” mentally, like her boss, George Bush and the rest of the Bush Administration. What is so scary about all of this stuff is that our leaders, who have all these spying capabilities are themselves mental morons, EOE's and ex-drug addicts! These are not the type of people you want to have these powers. Today, we don't only have a former drug user as president (as Clinton and Bush were) we have a drug pusher, street thug sitting in the Oval Office – a ironic twist of the Eddie Murphy “Trading Places” movie, where an incompetent black street thug is made into a Wall Street superstar over a $1.00 bet! Did Soros bet Koch a buck over Obama? It appears so.
Donald Rumsfeld all but admitted to this scenario of mine by charging that the Obama Administration did the same thing with the Boston Marathon bombing. He said, “all the signs were there, they just got caught sleeping.” Personal experience, perhaps? I think so.
Yes, I have known everything that we have “learned” from Edward Snowden for 20-30 years and I have never worked for the NSA or CIA! So I ask this, I am also a traitor for knowing what has been written about and discussed for the last 40 years? Is sharing knowledge a treasonous crime? I just think that our leaders, those evil people trying to force us into a ONE WORLD SATAN RUN SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT are just worried that the dumb Americans may be waking up and educating themselves. I hope and pray that this is so, but unfortunately I know The Plain Truth, and in the short run, things are not going to be pretty. In the long run, there is a God and you can discover for yourself what and exactly WHO is that God. Everything happening today was forewarned thousands of years ago!
Last week, in Nice, France, I was privileged to participate, along with 30 scholars, mostly scientists and mathematicians, in a conference on the question of whether the universe was designed, or at least fine-tuned, to make life, especially intelligent life. Participants – from Yale, Princeton, Harvard, Berkeley and Columbia, among other American and European universities – included believers in God, agonistics and atheists.
But it was clear that the scientific consensus was that, at the very least, the universe is exquisitely fine-tuned to allow for the possibility of life. It appears that we live in a “Goldilocks Universe,” in which both the arrangement of matter at the cosmic beginning and the values of various physical parameters – such as the speed of light, the strength of gravitational attraction and the expansion rate of the universe – are just right. And unless one is frightened of the term, it also appears the universe is designed for biogenesis and human life.
Unless one is a closed-minded atheist (there are open-minded atheists), it is not valid on a purely scientific basis to deny that the universe is improbably fine-tuned to create life, let alone intelligent life. Additionally, it is atheistic dogma, not science, to dismiss design as unscientific. The argument that science cannot suggest that intelligence comes from intelligence or design from an intelligent designer is simply a tautology. It is dogma masquerading as science.
And now, many atheist scientists have inadvertently provided logical proof of this.
They have put forward the notion of a multiverse – the idea that there are many, perhaps an infinite number of, other universes. This idea renders meaningless the fine-tuning and, of course, the design arguments. After all, with an infinite number of universes, a universe with parameters friendly to intelligent life is more likely to arise somewhere by chance.
Barack Obama once famously said that America, whatever it was, is no longer a Christian nation, and now a key critic of the socialist agenda Obama has pursued suggests he might have been right about that.
It’s because America not only seems dedicated to funding its own enemies, but also those nations where Christians are persecuted and martyred, according to Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.
“It is clear that American taxpayer dollars are being used in a war against Christianity,” Paul told an audience at the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s Road to Majority conference this week.
“It angers me to see my tax dollars supporting regimes that put Christians to death for blasphemy against Islam, countries that put to death Muslims who convert to Christianity, and countries who imprison anyone who marries outside their religion,” he said. Read the rest on WND.com>>>>>
Actor Ken Wahl, known for playing several iconic roles in the 1980s and 1990s, has been increasingly vocal about the current state of affairs in America. He has openly decried the Obama administration, made his voice heard about the atrocities at Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s clinic — and is even considering pleas from some that he run for public office.
Considering the rare occurrence of a Hollywood actor coming out as a conservative — and an especially vocal one — TheBlaze spoke with Wahl to learn more about his worldview. The actor, according to his own account, hold views with little rooting in partisan politics, as he embraces values over party ideology.
Photo Credit: Ken Wahl
“My family was very apolitical. We were just lower-middle class working people — and sitting around at the dinner table, politics was never a discussion,” Wahl told TheBlaze by phone of his childhood. “It was always about working — and I never considered myself a conservative. I never put a label on myself.”
Wahl noted that he was taught that the world doesn’t owe people anything and that it’s essential for individuals to work for themselves and their families — and to take care of their own.
“I didn’t realize I was a conservative until after I got into show-business,” he continued.
But rather than lambasting Hollywood for its politics or claiming that he was denigrated over his right-of-center views, Wahl said quite the opposite, citing inaccuracies that some conservatives advance about the entertainment industry.
“I think there’s been some misconceptions about that. … In all my experience — I had a very serious spinal injury — my entire career was only 11 years long, I can tell you that no one in Hollywood ever asked me for my political affiliation or my religious beliefs or anything like that,” he said. “What they care about is making money.”
That said, Wahl agrees that Hollywood elite are overwhelmingly liberal. MORE>>>>>>>>>>>>>
United States Declaration of Independence (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
By Bob Barney- The Plain Truth.com
I have a simple question that I hope that one day we would force every single law maker, government executive and judge to answer in writing. I think that it should be required every year in order for these persons to hold public office. I would want them IN THEIR OWN WORDS state why the American Colonists declared war on their own government. I would require these officials to state openly and publicly:
What were the direct causes of the war
Was their action of taking arms against their own government justified, or where they actually criminals that should have been arrested and imprisoned or executed for treason. And if the latter is the opinion of the official's writing the response, should we nullify the Declaration of Independence and declare the United States as a criminal government.
If, as I expect, virtually no one takes this position, that the USA is an illegal criminal government, then they should have to address the items in the Declaration as how they apply today to the laws that they are passing and why Americans would not have the right to take arms against them! After all, those colonialist who signed the Declaration, declared it LAWFUL TO KILL THEIR OWN COUNTRYMEN in what was actually our first Civil War!
What will it take for it to be legal for AMERICANS TO TAKE ARMS against their own Government?
Read for yourselves and you decide. Remember this point, the vast majority (the Gallop poll of the day) was against a war with England and opposed to these “patriots” we hold so dear today! Historians have estimated that approximately 40 to 45 percent of the colonists supported the rebellion, while 15 to 20 percent remained loyal to the Crown. The rest attempted to remain neutral and kept a low profile.
For the sake of those who do not understand the original language of the Declaration, I have enclosed TWO COPIES. A Modern English version (that I feel will truly be eye-opening) and of course the original version..... YOU DECIDE – can you answer my questions above, and if you can, what will it take for it to be legal for AMERICANS TO TAKE ARMS against their own Government?
The Declaration of Independence was written in such a way that many modern readers today might have a difficult time discerning what the true meaning is behind it. The Declaration of Independence in Modern English still carries the same meaning, but would sound a little differently. Let’s take a look at the Declaration of Independence and re-word it so that those modern English readers could read and understand it.
The Declaration of Independence in Modern English
Sometimes in the course of certain events there comes a time when a certain group feels the need to dissolve the political bands that have connected them with another, or in other words split up. We believe that God has entitled us to pursue this course and here are the reasons why we feel this way.
As people that have founded this land we believe certain truths and those should not be questioned: we believe that everyone is created equal in the sight of God; God has given us certain rights; the rights of each person need to be respected and cannot be taken from them. We believe in the right to Life; the right to Liberty; and the right to pursue our own happiness. We also believe that governments are formed to protect these certain rights and that the power of the government comes from the power of the people.
We also believe that if the government fails to protect the rights of its people that they people have the right to change the government. The government can be totally changed if it needs to be. This happens so that everyone can be happy and safe.
Changing the government is no joking matter because sometimes things have been the way they are for a long time. Even though sometimes people continue to put up with government that don’t operate correctly it doesn’t make it right and changes still need to be made. It is the duty of the people to make sure that the government treats the people fairly and civilly.
We, those who have been putting up with an inoperable government have been patient and suffered through a lot of things without complaining, but it is our duty to make the needed changes. It is evident that King George III who is our ruler right now, that he wants to take all power away from the people and will not listen to our leaders. Here is the proof for everyone to see:
We have been patient, suffering a long time without complaining. Now it is our duty to make changes. This King of Great Britain is King George III. He is our present ruler, and he wants to become even stronger. He has already tried to rule us completely, without listening to what our American leaders have to say. And we have proof of such evils. Here are the facts for the whole world to see:
The King has gone a little crazy. He has refused to sign laws that our leaders have written. These are pretty important laws.
The King has taken control of the Judges in our court system. Judges cannot be fair if someone else is controlling their jobs and how much money they make.
The King has also ignored the laws of our American government. He has created his own set of laws and now feels that he has a right to force us to give food and shelter to British soldiers, stop us from trading with the rest of the world, and has set up too many taxes for us that we have no choice in paying. He also wants to punish people without a fair trial and jury.
The King took our ships, and has burned our villages and killed many people.
The King has carried out several acts of war.
The King has also caused a rift between slaves and their owners and has made the slaves angry and violent. He is also trying to convince the Indians to go to war against the colonists.
The King is not a fair man.
Through all of these unfair acts that have been placed upon us we have made a great effort to tell the King how we feel. We wanted to resolve this peacefully but it has only escalated. A King that does not rule fairly should not be able to rule. We have continued to warn our friends and family still living in England and still, it has done nothing.
We, as representatives of the United States of America want God to judge our acts. We declare today that Great Britain will no longer be a ruler over us and that we should be free and independent states. We will have the power to build our own government and all the powers that come with government. We will put our trust in God and will be united in this Declaration of Independence.
HERE IS THE ORIGINAL VERSION
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
(The Independent) Whether you love it or loathe it, there is no intelligence service anywhere in the world comparable to America’s massive electronic eavesdropping organisation, the National Security Agency (NSA).
Virtually every news story ever written about NSA focuses to one degree or another on the seemingly impenetrable shroud of secrecy that surrounds all aspects of the agency’s operations, which to many outside observers gives it a more than somewhat sinister quality.
NSA does indeed try very hard to keep the specifics of what it does as secret as possible because, as any retired or current-serving cryptologist will tell you, electronic eavesdropping can only work if its operations are conducted in absolute secrecy so that the other side does not know what radio frequencies, e-mail links, or computer terminals you are tapping. Which is why the recent disclosures about some (but not all) of the agency’s most sensitive electronic eavesdropping programs have come as such a jolt to officials.
The Sigil of Baphomet: emblem of the Church of Satan (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
A special fundraising campaign has been launched by The Satanic Temple in New York to garner the resources needed for the organization to participate in the state’s adopt-a-highway cleanup program.
According to an announcement obtained by WND, the temple is trying to raise $10,000 which will be required to participate in the highway cleanup program.
The organization, whose leaders say they hope to convey “support, camaraderie, and compassion,” for the community, are looking for supporters in the effort to keep “our public spaces clean, safe, and enjoyable for all.”
The group, named after the personality whose biblical uprising against God crashed down on the whole world, said on its online fundraising page at Indiegogo.com that, “Satan stands as the ultimate icon for the selfless revolt against tyranny, free & rational inquiry, and the responsible pursuit of happiness.”
Satan, whose forte in the Bible was inspiring rape, pillage and murder, said the values of “community, compassion, justice, and civil responsibility” are “worthwhile … regardless of whatever arbitrary political or religious label may be attached to them in their execution.”
“The Satanic Temple seeks to separate religion from superstition by acknowledging religious belief as a metaphorical framework with which we construct a narrative context for our goals and works,” the organization said.
Organizers say once the New York Department of Transportation approves the group’s plan, the state will erect a blue-and-white sign acknowledging The Satanic Temple as the adopters of the designated piece of highway, “helping promote a message of Satanic civic pride and social responsibility.”
The deadline for the fundraising, officials said, is Aug. 5.
I think people have gotten the idea that there’s an Orwellian state out there that somehow we’re operating in. That’s far from the case… There are lots of protections built into the system… No one should believe that we are simply going willy-nilly and using any kind of data that we can gather… I think we need to do a better job of explaining to the American people exactly what is kept, what are the real restrictions on how—I’m just talking now for DHS, Department of Homeland Security–how we use it, how long we can keep it, how we share it, all those thing.” (source)What is the Orwellian state?